The ONLY solution to the primaries

By: relawson
Published On: 8/27/2007 9:32:51 PM

The only fair solution to primaries would be to hold the on the same day, nationwide.  Any other scenario has one state getting special status.  That just isn't fair.

Iowa and New Hampshire have had an unfair advantage in the primaries.  This is no way to pick a president - and it allows the few to have the greatest impact.  It just isn't right that the average guy in Iowa has more influence than the average guy in Florida.

So, my state decided to move the primaries up.  We would still be tied at fourth in line, so it isn't like we were on the same day as the cheaters - oh I mean Iowa and New Hampshire.  I don't think we should have moved the date up, but we did.  There is nothing I can do about that now.

So, instead of Howard Dean saying "this is all out of control, let's have everyone do it on a single day" Howard Dean said "screw you Florida".  He singled us out.  He didn't solve the fiasco, he just made it worse.

Someone please explain to me why it makes sense to have the primaries spread across multiple days.  If Howard Dean wants to put his foot down, it should be against the instigators: Iowa and New Hampshire. 

Anounce a single day for primaries, and exclude any state that doesn't vote on that day.  It is that simple. 

If a party that stands for fundemental fairness can't hold an election that is fundementally fair, well that speaks volumes.

Comments



What do you think of (Lowell - 8/27/2007 9:42:30 PM)
this idea.  I find it intriguing.


Much better than what we have (relawson - 8/27/2007 10:15:23 PM)
That would be a step above what we have now.

Why would we want a rotating schedule as opposed to a single day?  The rotation would at least give every region a chance to have greater influence.  But, that means that 2/3rds of the time your region will have less influence.

With a single day, your region never has more influence.  But, it never has less either.  It would certainly change how candidates campaign - no doubt about it. 

A single day is easy to manage.  I like the "Keep It Simple Silly" approach.

I also think that national primaries and election day should be federal holidays.  A rotating schedule would make it difficult to have a national holiday - unless each region had their on holiday.  That would be weird.



I like the idea of candidates having to (Lowell - 8/27/2007 10:31:10 PM)
test themselves over a period of time, rather than just on one day.  I also like the idea of having a mix of tests, small state/large state, retail/wholesale politics, etc.  A 1-day primary would kill all that, as far as I can tell.


Like debates (relawson - 8/28/2007 7:07:51 AM)
We have that already.  It's called a debate.  It's called scrutiny from the media.

You could still have straw polls.  Also, you could move the primary ahead to say March - which would give the candidates more time to debate closer to the election.

At the end of the day, we need to be fair.  I believe my desire for a fair solution outweighs anyone's desire for a more comprehensive test.



revolving early state (Alice Marshall - 8/30/2007 9:56:40 AM)
I would prefer a system or revolving early states. There could be a lottery, held immediately after a presidential election, as to who the early state would be.

Having worked in the NH Hampshire primary I can attest that there is value for candidates to jump one hurdle after another to tweak their campaign. It is also valuable to examine the impact of politics at the micro level. But it is insane that IW and NH have such disporportionate power, and it is dangerous to our political culture that the early states have such insignificant minority populations.

however we would need bi-partisan resolve to strip IW and NH or their status. If we refuse to seat their delegates unless they comply with the party plans.